A decade and a half ago, I stood here and outlined Scottish Labour’s vision for a national care service—not a quango or more civil servants but a co-ordinated national approach to provide locally delivered care, raise standards and end the postcode lottery. How we care for our most vulnerable people is more important than party politics, which is why Scottish Labour committed to help the Scottish Government to deliver such a service. However, I warned at the time that the devil would be in the detail.

In 2021, Derek Feeley published his review of social care. Having listened to people with lived experience of social care, those delivering social care and front-line workers, the review provided a blueprint for a national care service that we all supported. The SNP promised to implement the Feeley recommendations, but, instead of steering safely into harbour, it headed straight for the rocks. The Feeley review highlighted the importance of national accountability while allowing for local delivery. Instead, the SNP attempted a power grab by centralising control. It is therefore no surprise that COSLA walked away, warning that the bill could lead to significant destabilisation of services.

Four years later, three First Ministers later, three health secretaries later and £31 million later, we have before us a drastically reduced bill with no national care service in sight, and not a single extra penny of that money has gone directly into social care.

That, of course, is the elephant in the room: the lack of funding for the social care sector. Unless social care has true parity of esteem with the NHS, the SNP will continue to underfund services. Just look at John Swinney’s raids on integration joint boards’ budgets, which have left them on a financial precipice. Just this March, Audit Scotland warned that there will be a?projected funding gap of £560 million next year. As for the reality on the ground, while the SNP spent four years tinkering with its failed bill, there have been social care transport cuts in Aberdeenshire, supported living services put at risk in Glasgow, cuts to learning disability services in Edinburgh and the closure of the work connect project for people with learning disabilities in West Dunbartonshire.

The Feeley review outlined the importance of paying social care staff properly—something that Scottish Labour has been calling for over the past four years in budget after budget, to which the SNP has kept saying no. Fair work is a principle that we all support but, when it comes to taking action, the SNP is last in the queue. In fact, at the stroke of a pen, it has cut £38 million that was earmarked to improve the terms and conditions of social care workers. Just think what could have been done with that money, or indeed the £31 million that has been spent on the bill: that would be the equivalent of 1 million hours of social care. Right now, nearly 10,000 Scots are waiting on a?social?care?assessment or?a care-at-home package, yet the bill does not pay for a single extra carer.

The Feeley review based its recommendations on testimony from people with experience of social care. Rather than implementing those recommendations, however, the SNP Government set up more conversations with those with lived experience. I do not demur from that, but people have consultation fatigue; what they want is action.

As Lorraine, a parent of a young man with special needs, told me:

“The Feeley Report was really good and well received by carers. However, having spent many millions on this, the government have chosen to ignore what would have been a huge starting point.”

She ends by saying:

“We need ACTION!”

It is in that spirit of action that Scottish Labour has worked with the Government to salvage what is possible from the bill, and I commend the minister and her officials for working with us on a series of amendments: on Anne’s law, so that those in care know that they will always have the right to see a loved one—righting the wrongs done to them during the pandemic; on breaks for unpaid carers; on better sharing of information between health and social care; and on fair work, with better procurement and more besides.

Taken together, those measures will improve the social care system. Let us be clear, however: it is a job half done.